The ecoAmerica values survey, which I usually find
insightful, tweaked me the wrong way recently. The report tries to take the American public's pulse on environmental issues. One section offers
suggestions on messaging for environmental advocates, including this one:

Make climate solutions masculine to garner more support

Passive energy sources may be the solution for the planet,
but many Americans want action. The majority of positive attitudes on the
environment and current climate change solutions, such as wind and solar
energy, are viewed as feminine. Feminine issues are passive, and passive issues
do not require immediate attention. Themes of sacrifice and must do – also
perceived as feminine – are not bold solutions to climate change.

The majority of anti-green attitudes are viewed as
masculine. Problems perceived as masculine – tough problems – require
immediate, bold action. Americans with masculine, anti-green attitudes, such as
resentment and excuses, want big solutions. They need to know that whatever
America invests in and builds will work. They want bold solutions at scale,
that are visibly active, and yield significant, visible progress. They are not
attracted to solutions that cut off energy supply when days are cloudy or
windless…

How to unpack this? To me, what this reveals is not a
problem with how the American public views environmental issues, but how they
view gender (if these findings are accurate, anyway). And are the surveyors
simply passing along data, or letting their own biases about gender color the
results? There’s also an unspoken assumption here: men run things,
“masculinity” takes precedent in American culture; therefore, we must appeal to
men.

I understand the concept of opening communication channels
with and appealing to those in power. But must we downgrade “feminine” values (whether they're coming from women or men) in order to open those channels?

Far from being passive, women are not only on the frontlines of climate change, they’re also some of the most courageous advocates for
“immediate, bold action”. Accepting stereotypes about what constitutes a
“feminine” solution vs. a “masculine” one divides us when we need to be working
together.

Maybe instead of continuing to romanticize technocratic
solutions, we should recognize that so-called feminine perspectives are vital in
the current crisis. How might we build that recognition? What do you think?